Certain Stockton streets are city history writ in stone. But Lord knows what the El Dorado Street chapter says about Stocktonians.

City Hall decided to widen this main artery in 1994. Builders expect to be done by late July. No one can accuse Stocktonians of rushing recklessly into public works projects.

The city spent roughly $6 million on early phases of the project before the public realized the obsolete plan was uglier than a plateful of mortal sins.

That was in 2008. Preparing to expand a stretch of the street 12 feet, one northbound lane, workers clear-cut more than 100 trees. Pretty trees arching over El Dorado from Alpine Avenue one mile north.

Plans also called for removing the grassy park strips where trees grew. Construction would bring roaring traffic right up to the edge of the sidewalk.

The funny thing is not that a public outcry ensued. The funny thing is that City Hall approved a project in the first place. The environmental review bluntly said:

"The loss of the 101 ornamental street trees ... will completely change the character of the streetscape and could affect the neighborhood quality."

You wonder, what kind of red flag does a street project EIR have to wave before the Councils of old said whoa?

Apparently earlier planners were piously auto-centric. As long as a street project eased traffic, it didn't matter what sort of procrustean scourge it was. So the new street made pedestrian crossing scarier than blood-sucking demons? Fine. As long as commutes were smooth.

Seriously, this instance clearly shows that projects in the pipeline so long (from the last century!) need to be reviewed and subjected to further public comment.

And that happened, in a roundabout way. Residents of the Collegeview neighborhood got angry. A retired city landscape architect, Larry Nordstrom, who lived in the clear-cut zone, got involved.

"The problem is imbalance," Nordstrom said in 2008. "Unfortunately, the project has looked strictly at the vehicle, and moving the vehicle. But you can't eliminate all of the other necessities of life. Neighborhood needs. School needs. Quality of life issues."

Nordstrom ticked off the problems with designing roads solely for cars. Said streets are ugly; scary to walk; dangerous to bicycle; antithetical to this city's Strong Neighborhoods program; awkward for mass transit; hotter heat islands.

Nordstrom formed a neighborhood group. They barked at the council so effectively that the project was halted. The council sent the project back to the drawing board.

With citizen input this time. Nordstrom's well-mannered gang attended two years of boring meetings. Nordstrom moved to Temecula - so I'm not sure I can say "greener pastures" - but the group soldiered on.

A better plan emerged. One designed to offer safe and pleasant access to all users.